PATEL HIRALAL JOITARAM versus STATE OF GUJARAT

Citation: [2001] SUPP. 4 S.C.R. 378 · Decided: 18-10-2001 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: K.T. THOMAS · Disposal: Dismissed

Judgment (excerpt)

A 
B 
c 
PA TEL HIRALAL JOIT ARAM 
v. 
STATE OF GUJARAT 
OCTOBER 18, 2001 
[K.T. THOMAS AND S.N. VARIAVA, JJ.] 
Evidence Act, 1872 : 
. Section 32( 1 )-Dying declaration-Statement ,by a person-As to. any of 
the circumstances of the transaction which resulted in his death-Admissibility 
of-Held: The word "circumstances" is very wide in amplitut:f:e-Anything . 
which has nexus with a person's death, proximate or distant, direct or indirect, 
is admissible in evidence-The endeavour should be how to include the state-
ment of a dead person and not how io exclude it. 
D 
Penal Code, 1860: 
Section 299-Culpable homicide-Victim died of bum injuries only after 
afortnight-"2ndly" clause of S.300-Applicability of-Held: Mere interval of' 
fourteen days does not attract "2ndly" clause of S.300 so as to afford a cawe 
for mitigation of the offence. 
E 
o 
Criminal Trial : 
Death due to burns-Victim sustained severe bum injures-But death 
occurred after a fortnight-Death due to other causes-Possibility of-Held: 
Possibility of-supervening causes· is not a safe premise to decide whether the 
F 
victim would not have died due to bum injuries-Cause of death can be 
determined on broad probabilities. · 
Words & Phrases : 
"Circumstances"-Meaning of-In the context of Section 32(1) of the 
G 
Evidence Act, 1872. 
"Culpable homicide "-Meaning of-In the context of Section 299 of the 
Penal Code, 1860. 
The appellant-accused was tried for an offence under Section 30Z of 
H 
the Penal Code, 1860. The trial court acquitted the accused, but the High 
378 
.., 
PATEL HIRALAL JOTIARAM v. STATE 
379 
Court convicted him and sentenced him to imprisonment for life. Hence 
A 
this appeal. . 
According to the prosecution, the accused took out a can and doused 
combustible liquid therein on the deceased. The accused then whipped out 
a lighter and after lighting it hurled its flame on her. The accused sustained 
severe burn injuries and succumbed to her injuries after a fortnight. The 
B 
deceased made a dying declaration in which she identified the accused as 
her assailant. 
On behalf of the accused it was contended that the death occurred 
due to "septic" and not due to the burn injuries as the interval between the 
date of the incident and the date of death of the deceased was a fortnight; 
that from the statement of the deceased the identity of the assailant could 
not unmistakably refer to the accused; that the statement of the deceased 
was inadmissible in evidence as the said statement related to the parentage 
c 
of the accused and not to any circumstance connected with the death of the 
deceased; and that the offence would not escalate beyond 'culpable homi-
D 
cide not amounting to murder' since the burns caused to the deceased did 
not result in the death of the deceased during the initial fatal period and 
that her death happened on account of some later complications. 
Dismissing the appeal, the Court 
HELD : 1.1. Mere possibility of other causes supervening during the 
hospitalisation of the deceased is not a safe premise for deciding whether the 
deceased would have died due to the burns sustained on the date of the 
incident. The cause of death can be determined on broad probabilities. 
[385-C] 
Om Prakash v. State of Punjab, [1992] 4 SCC 212, relied on. 
Dhanna v. State of M.P., [1996] 10 SCC 79, refel"red to. 
Modi's Medical Jurisprudence and Toxicology, referred to. 
1.2. It is preposterous to say that the deceased in this case would have 
been healed of the burn injuries and that she would have contracted infec-
tion through some other causes and developed septicaemia and died of that. 
Court of law need not countenance mere academic possibilities when the 
prosecution cases regarding death of the deceased were established on broad 
probabilities as sequel to the burns sustained by her. [385-F] 
E 
F 
G 
H 
380 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2001] SUPP. 4 S.C.R. 
A 
.2.1. Tuo categories of statements by a person are made admissible in 
evidence under Section 32(1) of the Evidence Act, 1872 and further made 
them as substantive evidence. They are : (1) his statement as to the cause of 
his death; (2) his statement as to any of the circumstances of the transac-
tion, which resulted in his death. The second category can envelope a far 
B 
wider amplitude than the first category. The words "statement as to any of 
the circumstances" are by themselves capable of expanding the width and 
contours of the scope of admissibility. When the wor

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.